Follow DOT's lead on road projects

When the state Department of Transportation asked the South Carolina Transportation Infrastructure bank to help the DOT leverage $50 million in state funds into $500 million in bonds to move forward on a list of DOT priority road projects, the Infrastructure Bank promised to help.

"I think it's pretty clear that we've been asked to help DOT and welcome the opportunity to help DOT with their priority list of bridge replacement and Interstate improvements," the Infrastructure Bank's chairman Don Leonard told The Greenville News earlier this year when that promise was made. There had been concern that if the DOT turned $50 million over to the Infrastructure Bank, the bank might set its own priorities. Leonard's words were reassuring.

Last week, the board rejected a motion to fund the DOT's priorities as submitted. Instead, it wants to redirect some of the money for design work on other projects that are not among the list that DOT submitted.

This is not the way for the Infrastructure Bank to go about fulfilling its promises to the state DOT. The ideas being presented by the bank raise questions about whether some of the projects on the DOT's priority list would be completed in a timely manner, and the bank's actions certainly could give lawmakers pause before they try to similarly leverage any future state money.

Rather than putting their own stamp on how this money should be spent - and in the process proving some of the worst fears about how this money would be handled - the Infrastructure Bank's board should simply approve the DOT's list as submitted.

There is not a shortage of worthy infrastructure projects in South Carolina. A study by a task force found that the state needs $29 billion over the next 20 years to get the state's system of roads, highways and bridges to even an average rating. With that level of need, the $500 million the bank would borrow on behalf of DOT seems like a drop in the bucket. Given that funding is so scarce, it is ever-more important to spend available money on the most worthy projects.

This state is all too familiar with politics taking over the way highway projects are managed and funded. It is part of the reason the state's highway needs are so acute. The Infrastructure Bank's decision to re-prioritize the list submitted by DOT smacks of more of the same.

At a meeting in late October, Leonard asked the board to postpone action on an Interstate 77 project outside of Columbia and use that money to fund corridor studies or design work for seven other projects. He also suggested moving $100 million in infrastructure bank funding to rebuild the I-85/385 interchange to work on improvements for a 10-mile stretch of I-85 that leads up to the North Carolina border. He suggested the interchange in Greenville County be done with federal dollars; however, Transportation Secretary Robert St. Onge said those dollars are not guaranteed to stay at their current level, and shifting the money from the interchange to another project could delay the interchange work.

Rebuilding the I-85/385 interchange is just one sorely needed project in the Upstate. It should not be put in jeopardy by political posturing.

This is not the role that the Infrastructure Bank said it would play when it promised to help DOT fund much-needed projects with a creative plan that was questioned by some at the time as unwise because of exactly what it happening now. Taxpayers would be justified at being frustrated that politicians once again seem to be taking charge of how this state spends money to improve its transportation infrastructure.

Not only does this decision potentially affect when some projects will be completed in the near-term, it has the potential for long-ranging consequences as the Legislature decides whether to spend additional state money to improve infrastructure. Sen. Larry Grooms, R-Berkeley, cautioned that lawmakers could be timid about providing future transportation funding through the Infrastructure Bank if it doesn't follow DOT's rankings.

"If one of these two organizations gets outside the established ranking criteria, it would be a very tough sell for additional dollars," Grooms told The News recently.

That would be unfortunate. Lawmakers already are moving too slowly to free up money to improve the state's infrastructure. Anything that gives them further reason to drag their feet should be carefully considered and thoroughly explained.

The board will meet again next week. In a show of good faith, it should go back to the DOT's submitted list of projects and approve it. Doing so would be living up to the promise that was made earlier this summer. Not doing so, no matter how altruistic the motives or worthy the projects, would signal to state taxpayers that politics still holds sway over how this state manages vital functions. That system has rarely worked in South Carolina, and there is little reason to believe it will work this time.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Follow DOT's lead on road projects

When the state Department of Transportation asked the South Carolina Transportation Infrastructure bank to help the DOT leverage $50 million in state funds into $500 million in bonds to move forward